Why is Jackie Kennedy always referred to as “beautiful”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because she is the prettiest First Lady we’ve ever had.

No, she was just one of the youngest. Off the top of my head Laura Bush and Hillary Clinton are both better looking (and no, I do not think they’re particularly pretty).

Yep, she was the youngest by far since she was only 31 when JFK became president.

Nope. Grover Cleveland married Frances Folsom (21 years old at the time) during his presidency and in the Blue Room of the White House.

Frances Folsom beats Jackie Kennedy by a decade in youth.

…as noted on page 3 of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is referred to as beautiful because she was beautiful. Women copied her, wanted to be her, men wanted to have her.

Things have changed since then. I guess the people of today who weren't around then have their own opinions. I think the female icons of today (Taylor Swift for instance) tell us what standards are in vogue now. Certainly celebrities of today have the benefit of high tech photo perfection that Jackie didn't have.

Oh, come on. Did you take a survey? Or did you just read PR articles about how beautiful she was and how everyone wanted to be like her and how men wanted to have her? She was not pretty in her day in the slightest. Most women at that time were very thin. Has everyone lost their memory of that? Why don’t you take a look at some photos of other rich debutantes of the 1950s and 1960s. They’re all equally stylish and nearly all of them have much prettier faces than Jackie. Even her, own sister, Lee Radziwell, was much prettier than Jackie. The only thing that stood out about Jackie was the huge Camelot media campaign put forth by her husband’s team.

As for Taylor Swift, how did you miss the huge pages long thread about how many people think she’s unattractive and a mediocre musician? We’re not all in the same boat in terms of opinions, regardless of publicity efforts to claim mass, unquestioned adoration.

You can’t believe everything you read.

Nope. You are misinformed. Jackie was beautiful, charming, charismatic, smart, funny, and probably more popular than any other first lady in history even long after JFK's death. Here's a pic of her and her sister, you think Lee was more beautiful?

Yeah, as long as Jackie’s face is hidden by her hair, I suppose she’s not that bad. Also, that picture has an unfair angle for the sister versus Jackie. If you look at photos of just their faces, side by side, Lee (the sister) is significantly more symmetrical. Neither one of them is beautiful.

Like beauty, charm is in the eye of the beholder. Jackie’s charisma was on clear display when she sued Aristotle Onassis’ daughter over the inheritance her father had left to her. It’s not charming behavior to ignore a will and demand more money from an orphaned young woman.

I fail to see anything pretty about Jackie, but she did dress well on that $20 million settlement.

What a weird bone to pick. Jackie was left $3 million of a $500 million estate, and she sued *the estate* to get more. Ultimately they agreed to 20m and Christina kept the remainder of the estate, so Jackie got a small fraction of his wealth. I don't think we know what the basis for the asking for more was, whether it was a supposed agreement with Aristotle or something else, but it seems like it was resolved fairly. By all reports, Jackie genuinely cared for Aristotle.

Christina was 25 when her dad died, so not "an orphan." She did have a terrible time, with her brother and mother dying shortly before her dad, but Jackie obviously had her own trauma. I mean, none of this is relatable to me, not being a millionaire of any kind, but I think it's weird that THIS would be what you'd hate Jackie for.

One thing I read recently was that after Aristotle died, Jackie was dating another man for a time (another Greek) and cared for him, but when he told her that she couldn't take an editorial position because he didn't believe in his girlfriend/wife working, she dumped him. At this point she had her money from Aristotle and her new boyfriend was wealthy as well, but she broke up with him to keep a $200/week editor job because she didn't like him telling her whether or not she was allowed to work. I do think she had more substance than she's sometimes given credit for.